Judge: Matthew C. Braner, Case: 37-2021-00038278-CL-BC-CTL, Date: 2023-08-04 Tentative Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

DEPT.:

EVENT DATE:

EVENT TIME:

HALL OF JUSTICE

TENTATIVE RULINGS - August 03, 2023

08/04/2023  09:00:00 AM  C-60 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

JUDICIAL OFFICER:Matthew C. Braner

CASE NO.:

CASE CATEGORY:

EVENT TYPE:

CASE TITLE: CASE TYPE:

Civil - Limited  Breach of Contract/Warranty Discovery Hearing 37-2021-00038278-CL-BC-CTL MANATT VS GIL [IMAGED] CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED:

Plaintiffs Angela and Douglas Manatt's unopposed motions to compel are GRANTED.

The request for sanctions is denied.

Plaintiffs' counsel attests that Defendants Jaime Gil and Ana Marcela Gomez-Espana were properly served with deposition notices for depositions set for February 21, 2023, and February 22, 2023, but neither defendant appeared. Neither defendant objected nor notified Plaintiffs they would not appear.

There is no evidence to indicate Defendants cannot appear for depositions. Plaintiffs' motion was unopposed; there does not appear to be any substantial justification for Plaintiffs' failure to appear.

Accordingly, Plaintiffs' motions to compel the depositions of Defendants are granted.

Plaintiffs' counsel attests that Defendants were properly served sets of special interrogatories and requests for production on January 11, 2023, but Defendants did not serve timely responses.

Defendants still have not served responses, and Plaintiffs' meet and confer efforts were ignored.

In the absence of timely responses to interrogatories and requests for production, objections are waived, including objections based on privilege. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.290, 2031.300.) Defendants have not provided any legitimate reason for refusing to respond to Plaintiffs' discovery requests. Therefore, Defendants will be compelled to respond to Plaintiffs' requests for production (set one) and special interrogatories (set one), and any objections raised by Defendants are considered waived.

As to sanctions, the court was informed that Defendants' counsel is in a coma. (ROA #67.) Given the high likelihood that Defendants' failure to respond to discovery or appear for deposition is the result of their attorney's medical condition, the court does not believe sanctions are appropriate at this time.

The court will hear from the parties regarding a deadline for Defendants' depositions and to respond to Plaintiffs' written discovery.

Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

2942282  17